That's an interesting take. That CBS attempted to "suppress the report."

CBS hired Mapes, and Rather.

CBS let Mapes run with the story. Maybe CBS didn't know about Mapes' profound animus toward President Bush, but that's hard to believe. Everyone seems to have known about Mapes. But CBS hired her anyway, and let her produce stories for 60 Minutes. My guess is that CBS thought that Mapes anti-Republican bias was no handicap wahtosever, would have denied that there was any bias, and just wanted splashy news, whoever produced it.

Then, of course, CBS actually aired the Mapes-produced/Rather-hosted story.

CBS didn't 'suppress' the story in any way.

And even in the immediate aftermath, after the network's journalistic reputation was tarnished, with pajama-clad bloggers pointing out the shockingly amateurish forgeries that Mapes and Rather themsleves thought were so impotnat in the broadcast, CBS still initially stuck by Mapes and Rather.

And this is all "suppression" ?

More and more, I am loving the idea of this lawsuit. Dan Rather really is the gift that keeps on giving. Somewhere, I am sure that somebody is compiling all of Rather's apologies and mea culpas for the forged documents. All of his inconsistent statements on the subject. And all of Mary Mapes' Bush-hating rhetoric. I'll look forward to publication of any statements made under oath in the Thornburgh investigation. This new lawusit will do much to show the role of Dan Rather as little more than a talking head; if he had wanted to, he might have fessed up to his purely ceremonial role, and said, "Hell, I was just the narrator for that story. Don't blame me." But Rather's gigantic ego would never allow that, and now his gigantic ego won't allow him to let this pointless story go away and die like it should.

Walter Cronkite said he'd have fired Rather over that screwy scene where the Evening News was bumped back by a women's tennis match and Rather walked off the set. That would have saved CBS a lot of headaches.

At least Romney's money was honestly earned by Mitt or, before him, by his industrialist/governor father.

Unlike Edwards' expert-perjury-fueled malpractice lawsuits.

Somebody already mentioned Jon Corzine. How about Maria "Dot-Com Bubble" Cantwell? Writing herself million-dollar checks to self-fund her campaing, then declaring the campaign warchest bankrupt when her dotcom stocks tanked?

It's a long list of Democrat-millionaire candidates. How many millions did the charming Teresa Heinz-Kerry take from her inheritance from her late/Republican husband's estate and turn over to the Kerry campaign?

And is he getting all teary-eyed about it?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160275,00.html

In fact, Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page wrote that very thing just a few days ago.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010648

But thing that gets me about Hitler/Ahmadinejad comparisons is that Ahmdinejad is actually talking in terms that sound like the extermination of all Jews. You have to contort yoursefl into fine-line distinctions between Zion and Israel and Jews, in fact, in order to avoid the overwhleming comparison between the 1937 Hitler and the 2007 Ahmadinejad. I mean, who ELSE do you make comparisions to, when someone starts talking about the use of the military to achieve the destruction of Israel and the "Zionist enemy"?

Who were the two millionaires who bankrolled Eugene McCarthy's 1968 primary campaign? Together they threw in more -- a lot more -- than what Mitt Romney has donated to his own campaign, in inflation-adjusted dollars. C'mon, who among the Salon faithful knows their political history?

By the way, does George Soros count as one of the millionaires who has bought himself a bigger public-affairs megaphone than anyone ought to have?

...I just wnat to again link up these phrases:

Sen. Dick Durbin/troops/Nazis/gulag/Pol Pot.

Because it makes me want to cry.

I guess the new position for "progressives" is that Durbin was right to apologize for his comparision of U.S. troops to Nazis and/or Soviet gulag operators and/or the Pol Pot atrocities, and so now should Rush Limbaugh likewise apologize.

Whatever.

At least Rush Limbaugh wants our guys to win the fight. Durbin & Co. just want our guys to quit, declare victory for Democrats who opposed the fight, and start the '08 campaign.

Compared to the 'ol Cook County thug/pol Durbin, I think Limbaugh is a man of great honor.

Sure, Durbin was denounced by many in Congress. As Lilmbaugh is now. But was there a resoultion against Durbin? I don't recall one.

Wha happened was that Durbin at first dug in and defended himself, and when the party pollsters siad that it was really hurting the party in overnight numbers, then Durbindid the crying-on-Senate floor routine. It was nauseating, of course, to see a vicious street-fighter and old-style ward-boss politician like Durbin doing the crying act, but that was the end of it.

What Durbin said, in June of 2005:

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings..."

I suppose you could say that Senator Durbin did not make a literal comparison to American troops and Nazis. But of course, Rush Limbaugh didn't make any pejorative references to any broad groupings of U.S. soldiers, either. Limbaugh routinely, instinctively, praises U.S. troops. Limbaugh has criticized the few U.S. troops who have used their position and veteran status to undermine their remaining comrades' mission in Iraq.

So to Garry Owen but especially to Crook County's biggest Dick -- Senator Durbin -- I send out a sincere f.u.